[from billlifka] It was a fine time and a good
thing to be. I had many friends and relatives who were Democrats. In fact, most
were. Now, most of them are dead but I have new friends and relatives who are
Democrats, although not so many.
I was a Democrat longer than I
was Independent and that longer than I was Republican. However, I wasn’t
registered as a Democrat which may be like Bill Clinton’s having smoked pot but
not inhaling. Barack Obama has inhaled with pleasure, which may explain a lot.
The point is that my credentials as a past Democrat may be questioned but, I
assure you, Democrats of my age would recognize me as a kindred spirit. I was
born as a Democrat as I was born as an American and a Catholic, all being quite
compatible at the time. I chose to be a paper boy and a Cub Scout at the age of
nine. These were the first observable signs I had started to think on my own although
there’d been covert outbreaks of latent Libertarianism from the age of three.
I never thought much about why I
was a Democrat other than as a blessing of birth. When FDR ran for his second
term as president, my mother explained that all should vote for Roosevelt
because, “He was for the poor people, like us.” Being six years old, I always accepted
what my mother told me so long as it didn’t interfere with my plans for that
day. Even then, I thought it was a strange argument since I didn’t feel
particularly poor. Starting with my being a paper boy, it seemed even stranger
since all I needed to do to have money in my pocket was to do a little work and
just doing the work made me feel good about myself, also. Then too, I found it
hard to understand why FDR was great if he was for losers. At the time, I was
for the Chicago Cubs but in those days the Cubs won two pennants so I didn’t
think of them as losers until I got a little older. If my mother had said FDR
was going to turn losers into winners I would have understood it was like
hiring a new manager for the White Sox.
Despite my confusion at an early
age, I did come to understand why people would vote for FDR even if they
weren’t born as a Democrat. In fact, I think I would vote for him, if I were
over twenty one at the time because he did talk a good story and engaged the
federal government in a lot of activity, especially for a guy who needed to
operate out of a wheelchair. Now I know that activity shouldn’t be mistaken for
progress, but in those days it caused most people to feel better even though
the depression just went on and on until the war. When it came to the war, FDR
was one of the better presidents because of his ability to convince Americans
all would turn out well in the end. It also helped that he picked an
outstanding leader for the military forces and was convinced, mostly by his
wife, to let businessmen lead industrial mobilization. Like his cousin, an
earlier president, FDR was not comfortable with the private sector and
distrusted all who were in it; they just wouldn’t kowtow to his economic ideas
and lack of experience in their field.
By the time Harry Truman came
along, I was learning things that caused doubts about FDR but, still a born
Democrat, I would have voted for Harry if I were twenty one because Tom Dewey’s
moustache made him look sneaky to my eyes. On the other hand, it seemed clear
that Harry was straightforward and outspoken and I liked the sign on his desk,
“The buck stops here!” He was a guy who took responsibility for his actions and
had made tough decisions without flinching over what people might say about him. Even
then, I knew those were important traits for a leader. He made some mistakes
but if I were transported back in time with my present knowledge, I’m sure I
would vote for him and not because I was born a Democrat.
My family never got anything from
the Democratic Party, even though FDR was for poor people. Mostly, the Party
functioned in the large cities, like Chicago, and they got people work. This
was a good thing that people had to work for their money, like being a garbage
man. It was true that higher ups might be building inspectors and depended on
bribes for extra money but they had to support their families and come election
time they had to work hard for no pay in “getting out the vote” which meant
getting people out to vote. This is harder than it might seem, especially when
some people lived in cemeteries. On a national level, FDR did find work for
many in the CCC where they built forest preserve shelters and other public
works. My relatives found work for each other like when my father introduced
his brother and two brothers-in-law to his boss. That didn’t stop them from
being good Democrats even if they made a living on their own
Even though I was a born
Democrat, Ike seemed to be an obvious choice over Adlai Stevenson. Adlai was a
very bright guy and witty speaker but had the real world depth of a driveway
puddle. With Eisenhower, I drifted away from my Democrat birthright but only to
that place in between called Independent. I don’t blame Independents for giving
up on both Political Parties. Both have earned that treatment. On the other
hand it’s sort of like the idea of Purgatory, a place neither heaven nor hell.
I can understand why one might choose hell for all the fun that comes before or
heaven for all the fun that comes later. Choosing the in-between is hard to
fathom. Nevertheless, I felt comfortable there and then John Kennedy came
along.
In retrospect, I should have
suspected all wasn’t right about Kennedy. But he looked so good, had such an
endearing family and talked so convincingly, it was easy to succumb to his
charm. By that time, I had forgotten I was born a Democrat, but not that I was
born a Catholic and was offended that the presidency had eluded Catholics and
the previous one who had tried had been rejected primarily because of his religion.
JFK was assassinated and, therefore, deserves to be an “American Saint.” If he
had served a full two terms, he might well be remembered differently.
Ronald Reagan came upon the
scene. Admittedly, he was running against a guy who had failed in his first
term miserably. Nevertheless, he was dismissed as an actor, forgetting his
success as Governor of California and as President of the Actor’s Guild, a
working job. As an Independent, I had no problem voting for him and became
converted to the Republican Party during his time in office while retaining the
right of occasional dissent over peripheral items of dogma. I think I have
learned how to judge an effective leader of my country based on his past
performance in responsible jobs and his character traits as displayed in those
positions. I listen to what he says he will do and strongly discount what
others say he will do, especially those who have reason to lie about him. I
give no thought whatever to whether we share a political party, religion,
ethnicity or the many peripheral social preferences that exist in abundance.
Most
importantly, I imagine how this blessed country of ours will fare under his
leadership. I’ve been around for the great depression, being totally unprepared
for WWII, engaged in five other major military adventures and
countless minor ones and many social and economic crises. All has not yet been
manifested, but we are in the midst of what I believe will be the greatest
testing of America in its history. The foundations of our government, economic
system and social structure are under siege without restraining influence of
experienced leaders with the prudence and wisdom to chart and navigate safe passage
through dangerous reefs for the ship of state.
My purpose in this writing is to
convince those who choose the Democratic Party as theirs to vote for the
opposition candidates, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and that, in their doing so,
they will act to save their Democratic Party as well as their country. I write
as one who once shared membership in their party, although in simpler times,
and one who has voted for rational reasons and for not-so-rational reasons, for
candidates of my party and for candidates of another party.
Like many Republicans, I disagree
with some opinions of my fellow Republicans. I believe most Republicans respect
members of the Democratic Party and accept that contention between the two
major Parties is important to the well-being of America. I believe most
Republicans accept that elected officials from the two parties must find a way
to conduct the business of the country in a manner that addresses major needs
of the country without violating reasonable and critical beliefs of either
Party. It goes without explanation that many of the less important desires of
both Parties may not be agreed upon but can be subjected to continuing debate.
Such debate should be open and with courteous regard for opposing beliefs. I believe
that Democrats in my youth displayed many traits that are consistent with my
beliefs and exist today in many members of the Democratic Party. These include
patriotism, importance of the U.S. Constitution, belief in open debate and
legislative process, personal responsibility, the value of work, the
opportunity for all to improve their status in life and that it’s wrong to set
one group of people against another group of people in open warfare. If you
share these beliefs, you should vote for Romney and Ryan and for legislators
who have demonstrated the same beliefs, regardless of their party affiliation.
It’s dangerously foolish to
assume Barack Obama, in a second term, will change his stubborn march to turn
America into a second class nation subject to domination by world organizations.
He will continue to violate the Constitution as necessary to further his
totalitarian ambitions. His acolytes in Congress will continue to block open
debate to provide the excuse for government by executive order and bureaucratic
mandate. He will continue to pit one group of Americans against another and
seek majority backing through mindless wealth transfers that drive the country
ever faster into bankruptcy. It’s dangerously foolish to assume that a very
large minority of the public will accept this without resisting in ways that
will result in widespread violence. At least worst, the Democratic Party would
lose it’s acceptability as a governing body. At the very worst, the country
would be torn by violence that would rival that in the American Civil War.
On the other hand, there is
Romney and Ryan. Romney has proven he can govern effectively in an
overwhelmingly Democratic State and obtain support from egotistical foreign
Olympic czars. Ryan has proven he can work across the aisle and prefers
reasonable compromise to mindless contention. Both know the solution to
America’s critical problems lies in economic actions of the type in which both
are highly experienced. They are good people, just like most Democrats.
billlifka
